SR-404-002 (66)
PCD:AA:AS:PF:AP F:\CityPlanning\Share\COUNCIL\STRPT\2005\05APP-008.doc
Council Mtg: July 26, 2005 Santa Monica, California
TO: Mayor and Council Members
FROM: City Staff
SUBJECT: Appeal 05-008 of Planning Commission’s Technical Denial of Vesting
th
Tentative Parcel Map No. 061408 for an airspace subdivision at 851 19
Street for the purpose of constructing four new residential condominium
units. Applicant: The Aroff Company Appellant: Patrick Aroff
INTRODUCTION
This report recommends that the City Council uphold the appeal and overturn the
th
Planning Commission’s technical denial of an airspace subdivision at 851 19 Street for
the purpose of constructing four new residential condominium units.
BACKGROUND
The subdivision application was submitted to the City Planning Division on March 1,
2005 and was heard by the Planning Commission at its April 20, 2005 meeting. The
application was continued to allow the applicant the opportunity to add additional
information to the parcel map as requested by the Commission. The item was
subsequently heard on June 15, 2005. At that hearing, two members of the public
spoke in opposition to the project based on concerns regarding demolition of the
existing buildings on the property. The Commission, with six Commissioners present,
could not reach a majority vote on the subdivision application and the project was
technically denied. On June 24, 2005, the applicant appealed this decision (Attachment
A).
1
ANALYSIS
The proposed condominium project is subject to the development and process
standards set forth in Ordinance No. 2131 (CCS). This ordinance eliminated the Design
Compatibility Permit application for condominiums in the subject property’s zoning
district (R2), but requires Planning Commission review of the Vesting Tentative Parcel
Map. The project design will be reviewed by the Architectural Review Board.
The proposed subdivision is consistent with the City’s General Plan in that the project
proposes to construct four residential units in a low density residential neighborhood.
The subject property is relatively flat and is capable of accommodating the proposed
development density since five is the maximum number of residential units allowed by
the applicable provisions of the City’s Zoning Ordinance.
Appeal Statement
The applicant’s appeal statement notes that the project meets all requirements for
tentative map approval and that at the meeting, staff had correctly advised the
Commission that denial of the map based upon the potential historic significance of the
existing structures was not within the Planning Commission’s purview. In subsequent
communications to staff (Attachment D) the appellant’s representative also stated that
the subject appeal is required, by local law, to be heard within 30 days of the appeal
filing. If this timeframe is exceeded, the application is deemed approved. Though the
subject hearing date is two days past this timeframe, the appellant’s statement is only
partially accurate. Even if the 30-day time period is missed, a subdivision map is not
2
deemed approved if the project is not in compliance with local regulations. Thus, the
City Council still has the opportunity to assess this matter. However, as previously
stated, staff believes the project is consistent with applicable development standards nd
should be approved on its merits.
Planning Commission Action
At the June 15, 2005 Planning Commission hearing, two members of the public spoke
against the project on the basis that they opposed the existing buildings’ demolition.
Staff advised the Commission that this property had previously been nominated as a
landmark in 2003, but the application was denied by the Landmarks Commission. Staff
advised the Commission that Landmarks Ordinance Section 9.36.120(l) precludes
landmark designation of buildings that have been denied designation within a five year
period from the effective date of the final action. Therefore, unless significant new
information was presented, designation of the subject property could not be
reconsidered until October 2008.
In addition, the Landmarks Commission recently reviewed the demolition application for
this property at its March 14, 2005 meeting. It chose not to file a landmark application.
The 60-day period from which any member of the public, including the Landmarks
Commission, could file an application to prevent the demolition of the subject building
expired on April 9, 2005. The two members of the public who spoke stated that they
had not received public notification of the demolition permit application before the
Landmarks Commission. Staff informed the Commission that the process for demolition
3
permits does not require a radius map mailing notification; rather, the site must be
posted indicating the date and time of the Landmarks Commission hearing. Staff has
verified that the site was properly posted for that hearing.
Conclusion
The subdivision application meets the required findings for approval. Under local law,
the Landmarks Commission and the City Council are the bodies designated to make
landmark determinations. Prior to consideration by the Planning Commission, the
Landmarks Commission assessed the potential landmark status of the property on two
occasions, first in reviewing a landmark application in 2003 and then in reviewing the
demolition permit application of the existing buildings at the March 14, 2005 meeting.
The Landmarks Commission denied the landmark application and took no action to halt
the demolition of the existing buildings at the March 14, 2005 meeting. The 60-day
period for members of the public, including the Landmarks Commission, to come
forward and nominate the existing property as a landmark expired on April 9, 2005, with
no nominations. All required public notification requirements as prescribed by law were
adhered to in this process.
CEQA STATUS
The project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to
Class 3, Section 15303 (b) of the State CEQA Guidelines. Projects located in an
urbanized environment designed for not more than six dwelling units are, consistent
with the Guidelines, exempt from environmental review. Moreover, the project, including
4
the property and any existing improvements have been reviewed, and for the purposes
of CEQA, determined not to be a significant historic resource. Further, the Landmarks
Commission reviewed and denied a Landmark Nomination of this property in 2003. The
Commission reviewed a demolition permit application at the March 14, 2005 meeting
and did not take action to prevent the buildings’ demolition.
FEES
The project is subject to a Parks and Recreation Facilities Tax of $200 per unit and a
Condominium Facilities Tax of $1,000 per saleable unit for a total tax of $4,800.
In addition, the project is required to comply with the City’s Affordable Housing
Production Program as specified in Santa Monica Municipal Code Chapter 9.56. This
requirement may be satisfied by providing affordable housing on or off-site, or by
payment of an in-lieu fee. The applicant has opted to pay the fee.
The project is exempt from the Housing and Parks Project Mitigation fee established by
Ordinance No. 1367 (CCS), based on the fact that the project will not result in the new
construction of 15,000 net rentable square feet or the addition to an existing project of
10,000 net rentable square feet or more of office area.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
Pursuant to SMMC Section 9.20.14.010, notice of the subject application was published
in a newspaper of general circulation (Los Angeles Times – California Section) and
5
mailed to owners and occupants within 500 feet of the property, at least ten days prior
to the hearing. In addition, a copy of the notice was posted on the City’s website, and
copies of the agenda mailed to all City-recognized neighborhood groups prior to the
hearing.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACT
The recommendation presented in this report does not have any budget or fiscal impact.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Council uphold the appeal and approve Vesting Tentative
Parcel Map No. 061408 based on the findings and subject to the conditions as set forth
below.
FINDINGS
1. The proposed map is consistent with applicable general and specific plans as
specified in Government Code Section 65451. Specifically, while the subject
property is not located in an area governed by a specific plan as specified in
Government Code Section 65451, compliance with the City’s General Plan is
required. For the purpose of subdividing the subject parcel, there are two
pertinent policies that must be evaluated with the map; those policies relate to
building height and unit density. As noted and shown on the subject map, the
project complies with applicable policies, including unit density and height
standards for the low density housing land use designation.
2. The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with
applicable general and specific plans. Specifically, while the subject property is
not located in an area governed by a specific plan, compliance with the City’s
General Plan is required. As noted and shown on the subject map, the proposed
improvements will not exceed land use designation limits to building setbacks
and unit density.
3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development. Specifically, the
subject parcel is a standard-sized parcel located within an urbanized area
6
adequately served by existing roadways and infrastructure. The property is
physically able to accommodate the proposed development.
4. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development.
Specifically, the subject parcel is a standard-sized parcel located within an
urbanized area adequately served by existing roadways and infrastructure.
Moreover the type of development and unit density is consistent with policies set
forth in the City’s General Plan and other improvements in the general vicinity.
5. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure
fish or wildlife or their habitat, in that the proposed subdivision is located in an
urbanized area that does not contain habitats or would otherwise injure fish and
wildlife.
6. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvement is not likely to cause
serious public health problems. The proposed subdivision is for a property
located in an urbanized area and is consistent with other similar improvements in
the area. The subdivision of the parcel does not have the potential disrupt the
urban environment or otherwise cause serious public health problems.
7. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with
easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property
within the proposed subdivision in that the design of the improvements will
accommodate a 4’ easement for overhead power lines and incidental purposes
(use, maintenance and servicing of power lines) at the rear of the property.
8. The proposed subdivision is consistent with any ordinance or law of the City of
Santa Monica. Specifically, the project has demonstrated compliance with
applicable unit density and height limitations set forth in the underlying land use
designation. Moreover, as conditioned, the project must comply with all
applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, which will be comprehensively
evaluated during the City’s plan check review process, prior to issuance of a
building permit.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. All off site improvements required by the City Engineer shall be installed. Plans
and specifications for off site improvements shall be prepared by a registered
civil engineer and approved by the City Engineer.
2. A subdivision improvement agreement for all off site improvements required by
the City Engineer shall be prepared and a performance bond posted through the
City Attorney's office.
7
3. The tentative map shall expire 24 months after approval, except as provided in
the provisions of California Government Code Section 66452.6 and Subchapter
9.20.18 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code. During this time period the final
map shall be presented to the City of Santa Monica for approval. No building
permit for the project will be granted until such time as the final map is approved
by the Santa Monica City Council.
4. In submitting required materials to the Santa Monica Engineering Division for a
final map, applicant shall provide a copy of the approved Statement of Official
Action.
5. Prior to approval of the final map, Condominium Association By-Laws (if
applicable) and a Declaration of CC & R's shall be reviewed and approved by the
City Attorney. The CC&R's shall contain a non-discrimination clause as
presented in Section 9.20.20.020 (SMMC) and such provisions as are required
by Section 9.04.16.01.030(e)(SMMC).
6. The developer shall provide for the payment of a Condominium Tax of $1,000
per saleable residential unit pursuant to Chapter 6.76 of the Santa Monica
Municipal Code.
7. The form, contents, accompanying data, and filing of the final subdivision map
shall conform to the provisions of Sections 9.20.12.010 through 9.20.08.090
(SMMC) and the Subdivision Map Act. The required Final Map filing fee shall be
paid prior to scheduling of the Final Map for City Council approval.
8. The form, contents, accompanying data, and filing of the final parcel map shall
conform to the provisions of Sections 9.20.12.010 through 9.20.12.080 (SMMC)
and the Subdivision Map Act.
9. One mylar and one blue-line copy of the final map shall be provided to and
recorded with the Los Angeles County Recorder prior to issuance of any building
permit for a condominium project pursuant to Government Code Section
66499.30. Applicant shall also provide the County with a copy of this Statement
of Official Action at the time the required copies of the map are submitted.
10. A copy of the recorded map shall be provided to the City Planning Division before
issuance of a Building Permit.
11. Prior to approval of the Final Map, the requirements of Santa Monica Municipal
Code Section 9.04.10.16.010 (d) shall have been met.
12. The proposed condominium project shall comply with all applicable provisions of
Article IX of the Municipal Code and all other pertinent ordinances and General
Plan policies of the City of Santa Monica.
8
13. Pursuant to SMMC Section 4.24.030, prior to receipt of the final permit necessary
to demolish, convert, or otherwise remove a controlled rental unit(s) from the
housing market, the owner of the property shall first secure a removal permit
under Section 1803(t), an exemption determination, an approval of a vested
rights claim from the Rent Control Board, or have withdrawn the controlled rental
unit(s) pursuant to the provisions of the Ellis Act.
Attachments: A. Appeal Application
B. Notice of Public Hearing
C. June 15, 2005 Planning Commission Staff Report and Attachment
(including VTPM No. 061408)
D. Correspondence
Prepared by: Andy Agle, Interim Director
Amanda Schachter, Planning Manager
Paul Foley, Principal Planner
Ava M. Pecherzewski, Associate Planner, City Planning Division
Planning and Community Development Department
9
ATTACHMENT A
APPEAL APPLICATION
Electronic version of attachment is not available for review.
Document is available for review at the City Clerk’s Office.
10
ATTACHMENT B
NOTICE OF
PUBLIC HEARING
11
NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE SANTA MONICA CITY COUNCIL
SUBJECT: APPEAL 05-008
851 Nineteenth Street
APPLICANT The Aroff Company
APPELANT: Patrick Aroff
PROPERTY OWNER: Villa Christina, LLC
A public hearing will be held by the City Council to consider the following request:
Appeal 05-008 of the Planning Commission’s Technical Denial of Vesting Tentative
Parcel Map No. 061408 (Application No. 05TM-006) for an airspace subdivision at the
subject property for the purpose of constructing four new residential condominium units.
DATE/TIME: TUESDAY, JULY 26, 2005 AT 6:45 PM
LOCATION: City Council Chambers
Santa Monica City Hall, Second Floor
1685 Main Street
Santa Monica, California
HOW TO COMMENT
The City of Santa Monica encourages public comment. You may comment at the City
Council public hearing, or by writing a letter. Written information will be given to the City
Council at the meeting.
Address your letters to: City Clerk
Re: 05APP008
1685 Main Street, Room 102
Santa Monica, CA 90401
MORE INFORMATION
If you want more information about this project or wish to review the project file, please
contact Ava Pecherzewski, Associate Planner at (310) 458-8341, or by e-mail at
ava.pecherzewski@smgov.net. The Zoning Ordinance is available at the Planning
Counter during business hours and on the City’s web site at www.santa-monica.org.
The meeting facility is wheelchair accessible. For disability-related accommodations,
please contact (310) 458-8341 or (310) 458-8696 TTY at least 72 hours in advance. All
written materials are available in alternate format upon request. Santa Monica Big Blue
Bus Lines numbered 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10 serve City Hall.
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65009(b), if this matter is
subsequently challenged in Court, the challenge may be limited to only those issues
12
raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence
delivered to the City of Santa Monica at, or prior to, the public hearing.
ESPAÑOL
Esto es una noticia de una audiencia pública para revisar applicaciónes proponiendo
desarrollo en Santa Monica. Si deseas más información, favor de llamar a Carmen
Gutierrez en la División de Planificación al número (310) 458-8341.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________
AMANDA SCHACHTER
Planning Manager
F:\CityPlanning\Share\COUNCIL\NOTICES\2005\05APP008.doc
13
ATTACHMENT C
JUNE 15, 2005
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT AND
ATTACHMENTS
(INCLUDING
VTPM#061408)
F:\CityPlanning\Share\PC\STRPT\05\05TM-006 (851 19th Street).doc
14
Planning Commission Meeting: June 15, 2005 Santa Monica, California
TO: The Honorable Planning Commission
FROM: City Planning Staff
SUBJECT: Tentative Parcel Map No. 061408: 05TM-006
851 Nineteenth Street
Recommendation
This report recommends that the Planning Commission conditionally approve the subject application
based upon the findings contained in this report.
Project Summary
The applicant requests approval of an airspace subdivision at the subject property for the purpose of
constructing four new residential condominium units. Pursuant to Santa Monica Municipal Code Section
9.20.02.090, the Planning Commission is the responsible authority to approve, conditionally approve, or
deny tentative subdivision map applications. This parcel map application was continued from the April
20, 2005 Planning Commission meeting in order to allow the applicant additional time to revise portions of
the parcel map at the request of the Commission.
Process Review Time and Deadlines
Application Determined March 1, 2005
Complete for Filing
CEQA Deadline August 30, 2005 with extension
PSA Deadline August 30, 2005 with extension
Subdivision Deadline August 20, 2005 with extension
Total Process Review Time 104 days
(Days)
Property Information:
Zoning District: R2
Land Use Low Density Housing
Element Designation:
Parcel Area (SF): 7,998
Parcel Dimensions: 49.98’ x 160.03’
Existing On-Site One-story courtyard
Improvements (Year Built): apartment with three
buildings containing 4
units (circa 1935)
Rent Control Status: Four rent-controlled units
will require Removal
Permit or Ellis Act
removal
Adjacent Zoning Districts and R2; residential to the
Land Uses: north, south, east and Aerial Photograph of subject and
west. surrounding properties (August 2003).
15
Subdivision Information
Tract Map Number: 061408
Subdivider/Applicant: The Aroff Company
Number of Units: Four
City Engineer Preliminary September 27, 2004
Approval Date:
Required Off-Site See conditions of approval.
Improvements:
Covenants, Conditions and The CC&Rs will be reviewed and approved as to form by the City
Restrictions (CC&Rs): Attorney consistent with SMMC 9.20.02.060 and prior to approval of
the final map, pursuant to Condition of Approval No.5.
Fees: Parks and Recreation Facilities Tax ($200 / unit). Total tax = $800.
Condominium Facilities Tax ($1,000 / unit). Total tax = $4,000.
Public Notification
Consistent with SMMC 9.20.14.010, notice of the subject application was published in a newspaper of
general circulation (Los Angeles Times – California Section) and mailed to owners and occupants within
300 feet of the property, at least ten days prior to the hearing. In addition, a copy of the notice was posted
on the City’s website, on the City’s bulletin board, and copies of the agenda mailed to all City-recognized
neighborhood groups prior to the hearing.
Staff has received two letters in opposition to the project and two rebuttal letters from the applicant.
Copies of the correspondence is located in Attachment B. One of the letters suggests that the existing
buildings could be potential landmarks and therefore should not be demolished; however, the Landmarks
Commission has already reviewed a landmark nomination of this property in 2003 and denied the
request, stating that the existing buildings did not have any individual distinction worthy of landmark
status. Moreover, the Landmarks Commission recently reviewed a demolition permit application for the
subject buildings at their March 14, 2005 meeting and did not take action to preserve the buildings.
Therefore, the demolition permit has been approved.
California Environmental Quality Act
The project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Class 3, Section
15303 (b) of the State CEQA Guidelines. Projects located in an urbanized environment designed for not
more than six dwelling units are, consistent with the Guidelines, exempt from environmental review.
Moreover, the project, including the property and any existing improvements have been reviewed, and for
the purposes of CEQA, determined not to be a significant historic resource. Notwithstanding this CEQA
determination, because the existing structures proposed for demolition are over 40 years old and are
listed as a 5D3 (potential contributor to a potential historic district) on the City’s Historic Resources
Inventory, a permit to demolish the existing improvements will not be issued until the Landmarks
Commission reviews the demolition permit application and all requirements of SMMC Section
9.04.10.16.010 (d) are met. The City’s Landmarks Commission retains jurisdiction to review the
demolition permit application and to nominate the improvement as a City Landmark or Structure of Merit
pursuant to the designation criteria and procedures contained in Chapter 9.36 of the Santa Monica
Municipal Code. As noted in the previous paragraph, the Landmarks Commission reviewed a Landmark
Nomination of this property in 2003 and denied it at their October 23, 2003 meeting. Moreover, the
Commission reviewed a demolition permit application at their March 14, 2005 meeting and did not take
action to prevent the buildings’ demolition.
Analysis
The proposed condominium project is subject to the development and process standards set forth in
Ordinance No. 2131 (CCS). This ordinance eliminated the Design Compatibility Permit application for
condominiums in the subject zoning district, but requires Planning Commission review of the Vesting
Tentative Parcel Map. Staff has also completed a preliminarily review of the proposed four unit
16
condominium project for compliance with the base district’s development standards. This review is
intended to address aspects of the plan that could result in significant changes to the project’s design. A
complete code-compliance review will occur when the application is submitted for plan check. It is the
applicant’s responsibility to ensure that the plans comply fully with all applicable provisions of the
Municipal Code. The project is subject to review by the Architectural Review Board.
The proposed subdivision is consistent with the City’s General Plan in that the project proposes to
construct four residential units in a low density residential neighborhood. The subject property is
relatively flat and is capable of accommodating the proposed development density since five is the
maximum number of residential units allowed by the applicable provisions of the City’s Zoning Ordinance.
The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements because the
project design will accommodate a 4’ easement for overhead power lines and incidental purposes (use,
maintenance and servicing of power lines) located at the rear of the property. Pedestrian access to the
th
site is provided from 19 Street and vehicular access to the site is provided from the rear adjacent alley.
The proposed airspace subdivision will not result in the physical alteration of the public improvements
existing in the area. Moreover, this subdivision will not cause substantial environmental damage or injure
fish and wildlife species and habitat.
The parcel map is included with this report as Attachment C.
Alternatives
In addition to the recommended action, The Planning Commission may also consider the following
alternatives:
1. Approve the subject application based on revised findings and/or conditions.
2. Deny the subject application, with or without prejudice, based on revised findings.
3. Continue the item to a date certain to obtain additional information, with the applicant’s
agreement.
FINDINGS
9. The proposed map is consistent with applicable general and specific plans as specified in
Government Code Section 65451. Specifically, while the subject property is not located in an area
governed by a specific plan as specified in Government Code Section 65451, compliance with the
City’s General Plan is required. For the purpose of subdividing the subject parcel, there are two
pertinent policies that must be evaluated with the map; those policies relate to building height and
unit density. As noted and shown on the subject map, the project complies with applicable
policies, including unit density and height standards for the low density housing land use
designation.
10. The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with applicable general and
specific plans. Specifically, while the subject property is not located in an area governed by a
specific plan, compliance with the City’s General Plan is required. As noted and shown on the
subject map, the proposed improvements will not exceed land use designation limits to building
setbacks and unit density.
11. The site is physically suitable for the type of development. Specifically, the subject parcel is a
standard-sized parcel located within an urbanized area adequately served by existing roadways
and infrastructure. The property is physically able to accommodate the proposed development.
12. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. Specifically, the subject
parcel is a standard-sized parcel located within an urbanized area adequately served by existing
roadways and infrastructure. Moreover the type of development and unit density is consistent with
policies set forth in the City’s General Plan and other improvements in the general vicinity.
17
13. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial
environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat, in that
the proposed subdivision is located in an urbanized area that does not contain habitats or would
otherwise injure fish and wildlife.
14. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvement is not likely to cause serious public
health problems. The proposed subdivision is for a property located in an urbanized area and is
consistent with other similar improvements in the area. The subdivision of the parcel does not
have the potential disrupt the urban environment or otherwise cause serious public health
problems.
15. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements,
acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed
subdivision in that the design of the improvements will accommodate a 4’ easement for overhead
power lines and incidental purposes (use, maintenance and servicing of power lines) at the rear
of the property.
16. The proposed subdivision is consistent with any ordinance or law of the City of Santa Monica.
Specifically, the project has demonstrated compliance with applicable unit density and height
limitations set forth in the underlying land use designation. Moreover, as conditioned, the project
must comply with all applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, which will be
comprehensively evaluated during the City’s plan check review process, prior to issuance of a
building permit.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
14. All off site improvements required by the City Engineer shall be installed. Plans and
specifications for off site improvements shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and
approved by the City Engineer.
15. A subdivision improvement agreement for all off site improvements required by the City Engineer
shall be prepared and a performance bond posted through the City Attorney's office.
16. The tentative map shall expire 24 months after approval, except as provided in the provisions of
California Government Code Section 66452.6 and Subchapter 9.20.18 of the Santa Monica
Municipal Code. During this time period the final map shall be presented to the City of Santa
Monica for approval. No building permit for the project will be granted until such time as the final
map is approved by the Santa Monica City Council.
17. In submitting required materials to the Santa Monica Engineering Division for a final map,
applicant shall provide a copy of the approved Statement of Official Action.
18. Prior to approval of the final map, Condominium Association By-Laws (if applicable) and a
Declaration of CC & R's shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. The CC&R's shall
contain a non-discrimination clause as presented in Section 9.20.20.020 (SMMC) and such
provisions as are required by Section 9.04.16.01.030(e)(SMMC).
19. The developer shall provide for the payment of a Condominium Tax of $1,000 per saleable
residential unit pursuant to Chapter 6.76 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code.
20. The form, contents, accompanying data, and filing of the final subdivision map shall conform to
the provisions of Sections 9.20.12.010 through 9.20.08.090 (SMMC) and the Subdivision Map
Act. The required Final Map filing fee shall be paid prior to scheduling of the Final Map for City
Council approval.
18
21. The form, contents, accompanying data, and filing of the final parcel map shall conform to the
provisions of Sections 9.20.12.010 through 9.20.12.080 (SMMC) and the Subdivision Map Act.
22. One mylar and one blue-line copy of the final map shall be provided to and recorded with the Los
Angeles County Recorder prior to issuance of any building permit for a condominium project
pursuant to Government Code Section 66499.30. Applicant shall also provide the County with a
copy of this Statement of Official Action at the time the required copies of the map are submitted.
23. A copy of the recorded map shall be provided to the City Planning Division before issuance of a
Building Permit.
24. Prior to approval of the Final Map, the requirements of Santa Monica Municipal Code Section
9.04.10.16.010 (d) shall have been met.
25. The proposed condominium project shall comply with all applicable provisions of Chapter 1,
Article IX of the Municipal Code and all other pertinent ordinances and General Plan policies of
the City of Santa Monica.
26. Pursuant to Section 9.20.14.070 (SMMC), if the subdivider or any interested person disagrees
with any action by the Planning Commission with respect to the tentative map, an appeal or
complaint may be filed in writing with the City Clerk. No appeal or complaint may be filed after a
ten-day period from the Commission's decision on the tentative map.
27. Pursuant to SMMC Section 4.24.030, prior to receipt of the final permit necessary to demolish,
convert, or otherwise remove a controlled rental unit(s) from the housing market, the owner of the
property shall first secure a removal permit under Section 1803(t), an exemption determination,
an approval of a vested rights claim from the Rent Control Board, or have withdrawn the
controlled rental unit(s) pursuant to the provisions of the Ellis Act.
Prepared by: Ava M. Pecherzewski, Associate Planner
Attachments: A. Public Notice
B. Letters from the public
C. Tentative Parcel Map No. 061408
19
ATTACHMENT D
CORRESPONDENCE
Electronic version of attachment is not available for review.
Document is available for review at the City Clerk’s Office.
20